myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
PROOF: Obama IS the end of the free world
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 343, 344, 345 ... 407, 408, 409  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 1912
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 12:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

w8n4wind wrote:
good speech, so whats the problem?

Good grief!!!

*shakes head*
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GURGLETROUSERS



Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Posts: 1413

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 4:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If the accusations against Isobars are correct (deliberately trying to make mischief and get others into trouble) then the general anger against him is deserved, and he is the miscreant.

If Isobars is correct in what he claims, and over 30 forum regulars are no longer allowed 'to grace his screen', then there must, for reasons not quite clear, be a conspiracy against him.

The second explanation doesn't add up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 1542

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Iso has been beating his head against a brick wall for years and he hasn't yet discovered that he can't knock it over no matter how good the blow.

It only took me a month or so to see that the right will stay right and the left will stay left, no matter what anyone says or produces as fact. So bitterness and frustration serves no purpose other than raising one's blood pressure. None of us "old farts" need that.

So why continue the debate? It's interesting and informative and it keeps my keyboard skills up to par, plus it's a good way to enjoy my morning coffee.

I know the left won't agree, but I do think the right is pretty much up front about what we want from government. However, I think the left almost always avoids acknowledging the socialistic tendencies of the liberal view, so there seems to be less transparency.

The reason we have so much gridlock is that Obama simply leans further left than anyone in recent history, so the right is forced to put up more resistance for balance. If Obama does get re-elected, gridlock will go on for four more years. When the left moves toward the center, the right will move too.

As long as conservatives (some liberals too) believe that Obama wants to redistribute our wealth, guess what? We will hold tight and wait until he goes away. That's why the economy is stalled. If Romney wins, private sector investments in the economy will be right behind with billions pumped into the free enterprise system. Just my simple opinion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 3751
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

nw30 wrote:
w8n4wind wrote:
good speech, so whats the problem?

Good grief!!!

*shakes head*

Even Mitt, and Newt are distancing themselves from this ridiculous effort by one of the Right's biggest blowhards, Sean Hannity. NW 30 , I Know you are better than this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DanWeiss



Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 1979
Location: Connecticut, USA

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Techno, so your premise is that all that cash is sitting around rotting until a GOP President is elected? I don't buy that for a minute because is makes no investment sense. Public companies sitting on cash are ripe for a hostile takeover. Private companies sitting on cash are not growing, and private companies willing to invest in the right conditions but not doing so when a certain president sits in the Oval Office are risking implosion if anything else cuts their revenue. Things like, oh, credit cost.

Me thinks you overstate the stupidity of the business sector.

_________________
Support Your Sport. Join US Windsurfing!
www.USWindsurfing.org

www.konaone.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5560

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Techno--there is no substance behind this claim:

Quote:
The reason we have so much gridlock is that Obama simply leans further left than anyone in recent history, so the right is forced to put up more resistance for balance.


The current talking points for the right describe Obama as divisive and socialist--ad hominem talking points that are patently false. Take Obama's signature achievement, the health care bill. Obama firmly rebuffed the left wing in the Democratic party, who wanted a single payer program. He adopted a program that had been implemented in Massachusetts by a Republican governor--and added some additional cost controls. That program, including the individual mandate, had originally come from a very conservative organization, the Heritage Institute. (http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml)

In taxes and "wealth redistribution", Obama has proposed a return to the tax rates during the Clinton presidency, where the marginal rate for top earners was 39%, not 36%. To describe this as socialism, or as some have, a return to the rates under Kennedy (91% for those who don't study history) is pure sophistry.

For intervention in the economy, Obama proposed the kind of infrastructure investment--and tax reductions--that have long been favored by Republicans. The only difference was some funding to local government to prevent massive teacher and police force layoffs. But coming from Obama that program was quickly labeled wasteful by the Republicans, who in a stragtegy that bordered on treason, wanted to lengthen the recession and thereby have a better chance to return to power. Obama's fiscal policies with the Fed are no different than those of the Bush's, and indeed he kept much of Bush's Republican team to provide continuity to business. Now all labeled as socialism, without analysis.

The problem with your comment, and most of what passes for critiques from the right, is that it is merely basely accusations, ad hominen attacks, without analysis or supporting facts.

For most of us on the progressive side, Obama looks like what used to be plentiful in your party--moderate Republicans. But you kicked them all out, called them RINO's, and now you wonder why your party is in trouble.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stevenbard



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 4337

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 12:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DanWeiss wrote:
Techno, so your premise is that all that cash is sitting around rotting until a GOP President is elected? I don't buy that for a minute because is makes no investment sense. Public companies sitting on cash are ripe for a hostile takeover. Private companies sitting on cash are not growing, and private companies willing to invest in the right conditions but not doing so when a certain president sits in the Oval Office are risking implosion if anything else cuts their revenue. Things like, oh, credit cost.

Me thinks you overstate the stupidity of the business sector.


Sorry, I must disagree with you, but the wealthy have been buying Gold and short term treasuries (both non income producing assets) for a couple of years now, instead of buying factories. They will continue to do this if Obama is re-elected. They want to protect their capital from dollar devaluation and inflation, or market collapse.

This is rational behavior from the former movers and shakers. Why?Multiple factors including shortage of SKILLED workers, heavy regulation, lack of visibility and predictablility, Obamacare, and other reasons, including the epa and state regs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 1542

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 12:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac said:
Quote:
The problem with your comment, and most of what passes for critiques from the right, is that it is merely basely accusations, ad hominen attacks, without analysis or supporting facts.

My take on things is based on volumes of material from both right and left & how I think the country should be moving ahead. From all of that, I offered an OPINION, not accusations or attacks. It's what I and half the country believe. There is plenty of analysis and supporting facts to support the conservative view, you just choose to believe otherwise.

You may also want to use your spell checker. You belittled me once because of a typo, so I will level the playing field, but in a more humane way. We both seem to be human.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 3751
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 12:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bard, dont tell your little tale to Larry Ellison. He is buying businesses, homes in Malibu, and Incline, and he bought Lanai for the hell of it!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5560

PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 12:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Techno, glad my typo made you feel better. Back to subject--you attacked (not gave an opinion) Obama and liberals as having socialistic tendencies. The two policy initiatives on the table--health care and tax rates for the top bracket--are anything but. Obama rejected a government run single-payer health care system that could have been described as socialistic, for one that utilizes private industry in the shape of insurance companies and for-profit doctors and hospitals. It was originally proposed, in all essential elements, by Republicans.

The tax rate increase proposed is 3 1/2%--a return to the tax rates for many years, including those under George H.Bush and Clinton. What Obama and liberals propose to do with that is a) reduce the deficit; b) invest in American education and infrastructure. I don't see that, in any way as redistributing money--but as investing in those things that should, over time, increase economic vitality.

If you are going to make attacks without supporting information, it is, by definition, an ad hominem attack. I challenge you, with or without typos, to give a concrete example to support your accusations.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 343, 344, 345 ... 407, 408, 409  Next
Page 344 of 409

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group